Sharing editing access to one view and non-hidden fields only
I want to build a database and give selective access for users to view and update certain records and fields. I don’t want to give them full access to the whole base, for privacy reasons and to prevent people from getting confused and making changes in the wrong places. Right now it seems like it’s all of nothing, but I’m not sure.
The View Only and Form modes don’t work for me, as this doesn’t let people view the relevant data on a particular record, and update notes and specific information about that particular record.
Is there a way to create a view and only share that view and all of its non-hidden fields for editing? If not, please add that feature! Or airtable will no longer work for our purposes.
Thank you!
Page 1 / 1
I share Ziptie’s need. I need to give Editors the ability to view and edit any tables, views, or fields that are not hidden. If they are hidden I need them to be visible only to creators. This is a tremendously important form of encapsulation. I do not need this for privacy per se, but I need to hide the internals of how non-hidden fields and views work to prevent user confusion and frustration.
Ideally, any of the following field types could be hidden and therefore only visible to Creators:
Hide individual fields in a table
Hide entire views
Hide entire tables
Hide some dashboards
Hide some blocks in dashboards
Force some dashboards to be visible (not minimized) at least upon initial view
In this way, I can be confident of building complex rules into my tables about how information is computed, presented and edited without necessarily burdening Editors with having to differentiate between what they are supposed to know and think about and what they need to know and think about.
Need this exact function as well
Same here. Would be a huge help for us. We work as a organizer on projects with dozens of clients and partners and would like to give each side a view of their many-to-many relationships.
Goal here is to allow clients to view progress on their projects, and give partners the ability to see which clients they are working with.
I want partners to be able to give status updates on all of their projects and then our clients can automatically see how their project is being fulfilled by the partners working on it.
It doesn’t make sense to add 50 people as collaborators to achieve this with the current pricing structure.
This ^^^. Having to make a master database just to make copies if i want editors on it.
Another use case is: Making a client facing. I want them not only to have view access but can edit it. I end up having to make views for each table that shows me which records I have to delete.
Even if you restrict this behind a paywall, I am sure people will pay for it.
We built a tool that allows you to share only fields that you select.
Hey guys, i had the same issue so we built this to sync base together so we can share a portion of base with edit access to our clients.
We also want this. We want to hide hourly rates/cost information but show hours and other information that is editable by anyone, not just those who have permission to see financial data. Otherwise, we have to use tedious workarounds.
This has been my most needed feature since I started using Airtable years ago, and is the biggest reason I have never paid for, or needed the paid version. I would happily pay for AirTable if I could actively control each users view-access.
As the original poster has said, right now it’s all or nothing. Either you can only share a non-editable version (not very useful), or you can add them to your entire base (not useful when I have 1 view with 10 records I want to share ina base with hundreds of non-related records.
To rub salt in the words, your help article on this topic acitely tells you to Copy and Paste your records
Also not helpful, as now it’s just orphaned data.
And if I were to decontruct my data into separate bases and share it in 1 central location, now I can’t work together as a team, since each individual base can only be worked on within that base, plus it’s a lot of unnecessary base-switching and additional data management.
I realise the logic may be confusing on the backend, since views are ever-changing collections of records, and can be deleted/added at will. So the simplest solution which I think would be a big-hit, would be view-only based access.
Instead of sharing a Base, you would share a View with a user. Then you can see that user only has access to that view. It’s up to the manager to not delete that view, and you’d just need a pop-up telling them “X User will lose access if you delete this view”.
Alternatively, make the ‘shared views’ that are public, editable. That would also solve the issue since these are private links. Although then you’d have non-user data in the system which is probably something you’re trying to avoid.
Or you could do some cool combination of the two.
Either way, being able to comparmentalize the view-sharing within airtable would be a game-changer for me, and sounds like many others.
